UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  Agricultural  Experiment  Station 

College  of  Agriculture  E.  J.  Wickson,  Acting  Director 

BERKELEY,   CALIFORNIA 


CIRCULAR  No.  16. 

(November,   L905.) 

NOTES  CONCERNING  SEED-WHEAT, 

By  <i.  W.  SHAW. 


While  farmers,  grain-dealers,  and  especially  millers,  have  generally 
lamented  the  occasion  of  such  unusual  havoc  to  the  grain  crop  as  char- 
acterized that  of  the  past  season,  yet  it  may  not  he  without  some  com- 
pensating advantages,  if  growers  will  but  take  the  very  auspicious 
occasion  to  rid  themselves  of  undesirable  seed.  It  is  hoped  that  the 
damage  to  the  crop  of  1905  may  be  more  than  compensated  by  the 
greater  attention  given  to  the  selection  and  adaptation  of  seed,  so  that 
the  ultimate  result  will  make  for  profit  to  all  parties  interested  in  cereal 
culture. 

Many  of  the  conditions  on  which  success  in  wheat-growing  depends 
are  beyond  the  control  of  the  farmer.  Other  conditions,  particularly 
the  variety,  purity,  and  quality  of  the  seed  sown,  are  so  entirely  within 
his  control  that  he  alone  must  be  responsible  for  the  results  dependent 
upon  these  factors. 

Manifestly  one  of  the  main  elements  iri  the  production  of  a  strong 
seedling  is  a  strong,  sound  seed.  With  cereal  crops  this  is  an  ever- 
recurring  question,  and  unfortunately  is  one  frequently  neglected  by 
the  parties  most  interested.  Further,  it  is  highly  prejudicial  to  the 
highest  results  that  there  are  numerous  erroneous  ideas,  held  very  tena- 
ciously, as  to  several  points  concerning  seed-wheat.  There  is  little 
doubt  but  that  much  of  the  present  condition  of  low  yield  is  due  to  the 
lack  of  attention  to  the  rational  selection  of  first-class  seed.  This  fact  is 
being  constantly  emphasized  by  the  inquiries  made  of  the  Station  as  to 
the  quantity  of  inferior  seed  which  should  be  used  to  make  up  for  its 
admitted  deficiencies. 

On  account  of  the  extreme  conditions  which  obtain  in  most  parts  of 
the  State  with  reference  to  seed-wheat,  as  a  result  of  the  damage 
from  the  rust  attack  of  1905,  it  is  deemed  best  to  set  forth  some 
of  the  facts  which  seem  to  have  been  quite  thoroughly  demonstrated 
with  reference  to  the  matter  of  seed-wheat.  No  apology  is  offered 
for  thus  presenting  the  work  of  other  stations  touching  upon  the 
points  herein  covered,  inasmuch  as  the  special  cereal  work  inaugurated 
in  tliis  State  by  the  California  Experimenl  Station  in  cooperation  with 


the  T.  S.  Department  of  Agriculture  has  only  been  in  operation  for 
a  single  season,  a  period  entirely  too  short  to  yield  results  at  all  conclu- 
sive from  its  own  experience.  The  circular  serves  but  as  an  introduction 
to  the  work,  to  call  the  attention  of  fanners  to  certain  results  which  have 
been  obtained  elsewhere. 

In  the  light  of  the  positive  evidence  secured  by  numerous  investiga- 
tions it  may  be  said  that  it  is  eertainly  possible  to  add  to  the  vitality 
of  our  wheat  crop  through  more  careful  and  rational  attention  to  the 
seed. 

Effect  of  Change  of  Seed. — There  is  a  very  widespread  belief  among 
grain-growrers  that  there  is  a  necessity  for  frequent  change  of  seed  because 
of  actual  deterioration  due  to  continued  culture  under  the  same  soil  con- 
ditions. This  idea  is  held  to  such  an  extent  as  to  be  well  nigh  univer- 
sal. Yet,  the  most  carefully  conducted  investigations,  without  a  single 
exception,  go  to  show  that  not  only  is  there  no  benefit  to  be  derived 
from,  the  mere  change  of  seed,  but  that  actual  loss  occurs,  except  only 
ivhen  there  is  a  change  to  a  better  type  of  wheat,  or  to  a  more  vigorous 
grain  of  the  same  type.  But  this  is  not  the  main  object  usually  in  the 
mind  of  the  grower.  Farmers  are  continually  changing  seed;  the  one 
having  a  stiff  soil  must  have  seed  from  a  sandy  soil,  and  he  with  a 
sandy  soil  must  buy  seed  from  a  heavy  soil.  Then  again,  seed  is  fre- 
quently brought  long  distances  and  often  from  regions  of  very  different 
climatic  conditions,  with  the  hope  that  some  immediate  increase  will  be 
obtained  in  the  yield. 

Such  indiscriminate  change  of  seed  is  a  most  potent  factor  against 
proper  seed  improvement,  and  there  will  be  little  hope  of  improve- 
ment if  one  must  give  up  a  desirable  strain  every  few  years  for  one 
grown  on  some  one  else's  land. 

The  North  Dakota  Experiment  Station1  conducted  some  extensive 
experiments  to  thoroughly  test  this  idea,  "embracing  thirty-nine  dif- 
ferent samples  of  wheat  of  known  history  representing  the  varied  soils 
of  the  State/'  These  samples  wTere  grown  at  the  Station  under  con- 
ditions which  "make  such  comparative  test  of  great  certainty  as  to 
equality  of  condition.  *  *  *  Wheat  grown  for  a  number  of  years 
on  widely  varying  types  of  soils  were  then  planted  in  direct  and 
similar  soil  association."  It  was  found  that  standard  types  of  wheat 
of  the  same  variety  brought  from  different  soils  and  grown  side  by  side 
at  the  Station,  no  matter  how  marked  was  the  difference  in  the  appear- 
ance of  the  original  seed,  all  gave  approximately  the  same  results. 
"In  those  in  which  slight  variation  did  occur  it  was  found  that  other 
elements  constituted  the  matter  of  cause.  That  is  to  say,  seed  grain 
from  a  special  type  of  soil  has  not  been  found  to  vary  in  the  product 
because  of  the  fact  that  it  came  from  a  peculiar  soil." 

'Bulletin  17,  North  Dakota  Experiment  Station:  H.  L.  Bolly. 


—  3  - 

These  results  were  further  corroborated  by  similar  tests  of  injured 
wheats,  the  only  apparent  difference  in  these  samples  being  that  the 
product  fr<)»)  weak  *ccd  was  very  inferior  in  quantity. 

To  further  test  the  idea  of  gain  from  a  change  of  soil,  seed  was  sent 
from  the  Station  to  various  types  of  land  in  other  portions  of  the 
State. 

The  result  of  these  and  other  experiments  indicates  that  varieties  of 
wheat  do  not  degenerate  per  se,  at  least  within  any  reasonable  length 
of  time,  by  being  grown  continually  upon  any  one  soil.  In  other 
words,  that  a  given  type  of  soil  seems  to  produce  certain  well-defined 
characteristics  in  the  kernel  of  whatever  variety  may  be  grown  upon  it. 

That  Darwin,  that  great  observer  of  nature's  laws,  did  not  share  in 
the  idea  of  degeneracy  is  indicated  from  his  statement:  "I  never  have 
seen  grain  which  has  either  been  improved  or  degenerated  by  cultiva- 
tion so  as  to  convey  the  change  to  the  succeeding  crop."  *  He  also 
cites  Dalbret  as  having  cultivated  160  kinds  for  a  period  of  thirty 
years,  all  of  which  kept  true.2 

Results  obtained  at  the  Ohio  Experiment  Station  further  confirm 
this  idea.  Velvet  Chaff  and  Silver  Chaff  have  been  grown  continuously 
without  change  of  seed  for  twelve  years;  no  loss  of  quantity  or  capacity 
to  yield  is  noted.3 

4At  the  Indiana  Station,  Fultz,  Michigan  Amber,  and  Velvet  Chaff 
have  been  grown  eleven  consecutive  years.  The  average  yield  for  the 
first  ten  years  was  27.3,  29.4,  and  29.8  bushels.  The  eleventh  year 
(1894)  the  yields  were  39.67,  35.66,  and  27  bushels,  from  which  Pro- 
fessor Latta  says:  "It  is  high  time  that  the  farmer  everywhere  should 
abandon  the  notion  that  wheat  will  'run  out'." 

5  The  North  Dakota  Station,  in  discussing  the  same  matter,  cites 
results  with  six  varieties  of  wheat  the  exact  history  of  which  was 
known,  as  follows: 

Bushels. 
Average  yield  of  wheat  from  seed  home  grown  continuously  (7  years) ._  22.(>7 
Average  yield  of  wheat  from  seed  which  had  taken  a  vacation  for  three 

years':  Minnesota  first  and  second  crop .. 18.55 

Difference  in  favor  of  the  old  seed 4.12 

Average  yield  of  wheat  from  Minnesota  seed  grown  in  North  Dakota 

one  year 21.K8 

Average  yield  of  wheat  from  seed  direct  from  Minnesota 20.<>4 

Difference  in  favor  of  the  older  seed 1.24 

Average  yield  of  wheat  from  Minnesota  seed  grown  in  North  Dakota 

two  years 36.59 

Average  yield  of  wheat  from  Minnesota  seed  grown  in  North  Dakota 

one  year 31.00 

Difference  in  favor  of  the  older  seed 5.59 

•Animals  and  Plants  under  Domestication.     Vol.  I,  p.  38. 

2 Citation  from  Loisleur:  Des  Longchamps,  Considerations  sur  les  Cereals,  pp.   15  70. 

3  Bulletin  42,  p.  88,  Ohio  Experiment  Station. 

4 Bulletin  51,  Indiana  Experiment  Station. 

5 Bulletin,  North  Dakota  Experiment  Station,  p.  422. 


_   4    — 

Here  is  shown  ;i  case  in  which  a  change  of  srcd  was  the  only  factor, 
the  selection  of  the  seed  and  its  manner  of  growing  having  been  the 
same. 

'Prof.  T.  L.  Lyon,  of  the  Nebraska  Experiment  Station,  in  experi- 
ments continued  from  1899  to  l(-)04,  comes  to  the  following  conclusion: 
"That  a  variety  brought  from  a  more  humid  to  a  drier  climate  will  not 
do  as  well  for  a  number  of  years  as  the  same  variety 'which  has  been 
grown  in  the  dry  climate  continuously." 

In  the  light  of  these  carefully  conducted  experiments  we  may  safely 
lav  down  the  principle  that  unless  the  change  be  for  the  purpose  of 
obtaining  a  better  variety  or  a  stronger  seed  there  can  be  no  advantage 
resulting  from  a  change  of  seed-wheat,  and  in  case  seed  be  purchased 
from  a  portion  of  the  country  where  climatic  conditions  are  quite  unlike 
those  of  California  tin1  seed  is  not  likely  to  be  at  its  best  for  several 
years. 

If  seed  shows  signs  of  running-out  it  simply  means  that  proper  care 
has  not  been  taken  in  the  selection  of  the  seed  to  remove  small,  shriv- 
eled, and  light-weight  kernels,  and  to  use  only  plump  kernels.  With 
proper  care  in  the  selection  of  seed,  wheat  does  not  deteriorate  from 
any  change  within  itself.  But  to  maintain  the  standard  of  yield  rare 
must  he  talm)  in  the  selection  of  the  best  seed  and  to  practice  rational 
methods  of  rotation,  manuring,  and  tillage  to  maintain  the  fertility  of 
the  soil. 

Large  vs.  Small  Kernels  for  Seed. — This  is  another  of  the  mooted 
questions  among  growers,  aiubthe  evidence  presented  below  is  respect- 
fully submitted  for  their  consideration: 

The  Nebraska  Experiment  Station  presents  the  following  results  of 
two  years'  trials: 


From  heavy  seed  . .. 
From  ordinary  seed 
From  light  seed 


Turkey  Red  Wheat-. 
Yield  per  Acre:  Bushteli 


1899. 


2!).  5 
27.5 
23.0 


1900. 


29.3 
26.3 
26.7 


Big  Frame  Wheat. 

Yield  per  Aere:   Bushel 


1900. 


25. 1 

25.8 
20.5 


27.7 
25.8 
21.2 


The  average  yield  for  both  varieties  for  each-year  is  as  follows: 

1900.  1901. 

From  heavy  seed 27.3  bu.  28.5bu. 

Prom  ordinary  seed . -(i-~  ("  25.9   ^ 

From  light  seed —  21.8  '  2d.a 


Bulletin  si),  Nebraska  Experiment  Station. 


Yield  oj 

0  rat  a  and  Straw. 

ii>oi. 

1902 

L903. 

Average. 

Grain. 

Straw. 

Grain. 

Straw. 

Grain. 

Straw. 

Grain. 

Straw. 

LARGE    HEADS. 

From  large  grains 

From  small  grains 

b  a. 
29.3 

22.7 

toils. 

2.12 

1."  76 

bn. 
27.50 
23. 4(i 

Ill  IIS. 

1.50 
1.36 

bn . 

40.31 

39.58 

tans. 

3.44 

3.41 

bn. 

32.37 
28.5(5 

tons. 

2.35 

2.18 

MKDITM   HEADS. 

From  largo  grains  

From  small  grains 

29.3 
29.0 

2.04 
2.13 

30.41 

27.80 

1 .63 
J. 36 

38.33 
26.25 

3.65 

3.36 

32.  (.8 
31.01 

2.44 

2.28 

SMALL    HEADS. 

From  large  grains  ... 
From  small  grains. .. 

28.2 

26. 1 

2.21 
2.  IS 

24.60 
20.00 

1.13 
.90 

32.50 
31.14 

3.00 
2.72 

28.63 
25.75 

2.11 
1.93 

GENERAL  SELECTION. 

From  large  grains 

Fromcom'l  sample 

From  small  grains 

30.4 
22.9 
24.5 

2.27 

1.84 
1.85 

20.60 
20.60 
14.30 

.88 

1.08 

.70 

34.79 
34.47 
31.46 

2.73 
2.72 
2.61 

28.60 
26.00 
23.42 

1.96 
1.88 
1.72 

1  The  Tennessee  Experiment  Station  presents  the  following  data: 

T              u  Weight  of 

Large  Heads.  Grains, lbs. 

Large  grains 2418.7 

Small  grains 2375.0 

Medium   Heads. 

Large  grains 2300.0 

Small  grains 2175.0 

Small  Heads. 

Large  grains 1850.0 

Small  grains 1868.7 

General  Selection. 

Large  grains  2087.5 

Commercial  sample 2068.7 

Small  grains 1887.5 

The  results  given  below  were  obtained  by  Dr.  N.  A.  Cobb,  New  South 
Wales2,  the  experiments  covering  three  years,  and  were  far  too  exhaust- 
ive to  consider  each  separately.  Suffice  it  to  say  that  with  numerous 
check-plots  the  investigation  embraced  twenty-four  varieties  of  wheat 
separated  into  large,  medium,  and  small  grains,  as  in  the  above-named 
experiment,  and  the  average  results  obtained  were  as  follows: 

Bushels  per  Acre. 
1st  year.       2d  year. 

From  large  plump  grain 32.02  10.34 

From  medium  plump  grain 26.77  8.66 

From  small  plump  grain 24.86  6.50 

Large  and  Plump  vs.  Small  and  Shriveled  Seed. — For  the  present 
season  the  results  presented  under  this  head  should  have  special  appli- 
cation, since  there  are  so  many  farmers,  as  a  result  of  the  extreme  rust 
conditions  of  1905,  who  have  on  hand  nothing  but  badly  shriveled 
(pinched)  seed.  The  question  is  constantly  being  put  to  the  Station 
authorities  as  to  the  value  of  pinched  grain  for  seed  purposes,  and  it  is 

1  Bulletin  No.  4,  Vol.  XVI,  Tennessee  Experiment  Station,  p.  77. 

2  Seed  Wheat:  Misc.  Pub.  No.  625,  N.  S.  \V.  Department  of  Agriculture. 


hoped  that   the  following  results  secured  by  Dr.  N.  A.  Cobb  in   New 

South  Wales1  in  a  most  painstaking  investigation  may  prove  suggestive. 

These  experiments  covered   five    varieties,    which    gave    the    following 

average  results,  they  being  uniformly  in  favor  of  the  plump  seed: 

From  plump  seed 20.18  bu. 

From  shrunken  seed 18.52   " 

That  the  germination  of  such  seeds  is  fair  is  indicated  by  a  test  made 
by  the  writer  of  this  circular,  which  showed  9*2  per  cent  of  the  grain 
actually  germinated;  but  the  plantlets  were  very  weak  and  undoubtedly 
their  vitality  would  always  remain  low. 

It  is  not  easy  to  give  an  accurate  definition  as  to  what  is  meant  by 
shriveled  seed,  but  the  following  illustration  will  serve  to  show  the 
contrast  between  plump  and  shriveled  seed  as  here  discussed.  Doubt- 
less the  entire  discussion  is  due  to  the  fact  that  extremelv  inferior-look- 


Fig.  1.    A  good  type  of  seed-wheat: 
natural  size. 


Fig. 


A  type  of  seed  very  much  shrunken 
natural  size. 


ing  seed  will  actually  germinate  and  to  a  certain  extent  grow  and  bear 
a  crop,  and  under  favorable  conditions  may  even  produce  a  good  yield. 
This  fact  has  unfortunately  given  rise  to  much  carelessness  in  the 
selection  of  seed-wheat,  which  must  be  overcome  if  we  are  to  secure  the 
highest  results  in  grain  culture. 

These  results  are  in  entire  harmony  with  what  we  know  as  to  the 
necessity  of  securing  vigorous,  plump  seed  in  the  case  of  alfalfa  and 
other  crops.  The  same  fact  is  recognized  by  the  farmer  with  reference 
to  the  parentage  of  his  animals,  but  unfortunately  the  idea  holds  that 
the  case  is  different  with  wheat.  It  is  to  be  hoped  that  grain-growers 
will  take  advantage  of  the  condition  of  much  of  the  local  supply  of 
wheat  to  secure  new  seed,  and  start  with  a  good  type  of  seed-wheat. 

In  this  connection  it  may  be  mentioned  that  there  will  be  no  more 
favorable  time  than  this  to  make  a  trial  of  some  of  the  harder  winter 
wheats,  especially  that    desirable    bread    variety  known    as    "Turkey 

1  Seed  Wheat:  Misc.  Pub.  No.  625,  N.  S.  W.  Department  of  Agriculture. 


Red,"  which  gave  so  much  promise   last   season  when  grown  alongside 
of  our  more  common  varieties. 

Prevention  of  Smut. — An  examination  of  a  large  number  of  samples 
of  California-grown  wheat  shows  a  deplorable  lack  of  attention  to  the 
prevention  of  smut.  Farmers  doubtless  do  not  realize  the  large  loss 
which  occurs  from  this  trouble.  In  a  number  of  cases  the  samples 
have  shown  as  high  as  10  per  eent  of  smutted  grains — an  amount  suf- 
ficient to  seriously  affect  the  profit  from  the  crop.  This  is  more  to  be 
deplored  since  the  methods  which  can  be  employed  are  both  easy  of 
application  and  extremely  effective. 

There  are  three  methods  which  can  be  recommended  as  well  nigh 
positive  in  result,  when  the  seed  has  been  properly  treated.  These 
methods  are  set  forth  below7  in  the  order  in  which  they  are  recom- 
mended. 

FORMALDEHYD    METHOD. 

Use  one  pound  of  formaldehyd  (40  per  cent  strength,  known  as  for- 
malin) to  50  gallons  of  water.  The  solution  may  be  placed  in  barrels 
or  tanks  until  used.  The  wheat  may  be  dipped  into  the  solution  in 
loosely  woven  bags  or  wire  baskets,  allowed  to  remain  for  ten  minutes, 
and  then  drained  to  save  all  the  liquid  possible,  and  dried  when  it  is 
ready  to  sow. 

If  it  is  preferred,  the  seed  may  be  spread  on  a  clean  canvas  or  board 
floor  and  the  formaldehyd  solution  applied  with  a  sprinkler,  or  hose  and 
nozzle,  constantly  stirring  and  mixing  the  grain  with  a  rake  or  shovel 
until  all  the  kernels  are  thoroughly  wetted,  when  it  is  allowed  to  dry. 

Be  sure  to  get  40  per  cent  formalin.  Dealers  sometimes  give  a  25  or 
30  per  cent  formalin  for  a  40  per  cent. 

The  formalin  should  be  weighed  in  order  to  make  sure  that  a  full 
pound  to  each  50  gallons  of  water  be  used.  The  cans  in  which  the 
formalin  comes  often  contains  only  three  fourths  of  a  pound,  hence  the 
necessity  of  this  precaution. 

This  treatment  has  an  advantage  over  some  others,  in  that  it  is  not 
poisonous  to  persons  handling  the  material. 

BLUESTONE    OR    COPPER  SULFATE    METHOD. 

This  is  the  method  practiced  almost  exclusively  in  California.  Its 
lack  of  effectiveness  in  many  cases  may  generally  be  traced  to  a  lack  of 
thoroughness  in  the  work.  The  details  of  the  treatment  are  the  same 
as  in  the  formalin  method. 

A  solution  is  made  by  dissolving  1  pound  of  blue  vitriol  in  4  gallons 
of  cold  water,  and  dipping  the  wheat  in  the  solution,  as  above,  until  the 
grain  has  become  thoroughly  wet,  after  which  it  is  immediately  dried. 
Or  the  wheat  may  be  piled  upon  a  floor  or  canvas,  and  thoroughly 


-   8  — 

sprinkled  or  sprayed  with  the  solution  while  the  grain  is  being  con- 
stantly shoveled  over,  so  that  every  grain  becomes  wet  over  the  entire 
surface.  Care  should  be  taken  that  the  solution  is  of  uniform  density 
by  thoroughly  agitating  just  previous  to  use. 

HOT- WATER    METHOD. 

When  the  proper  care  is  taken  this  method  has  proven  very  effective. 

Utensils  Required. — 1st,  a  boiler  or  large  kettle  in  which  to  boil 
water;  2d,  a  vessel  for  cold  water;  3d,  a  vessel  for  water  at  120°-132° 
F.;  4th,  a  vessel,  barrel,  or  tank  containing  water  kept  constantly 
between  132°  and  135°  F.;  5th,  a  drying  place  where  the  grain  is  dried 
so  it  will  pass  through  the  drill  or  seeder;  and  6th,  an  accurate  ther- 
mometer to  keep  the  temperature  of  the  water  within  the  above  limits. 

How  to  Proceed. — The  vessels  having  been  arranged  and  filled  with 
water  at  the  proper  temperature,  some  convenient  bulk  of  well-cleaned 
seed-wheat  is  taken  in  a  loosely-woven  bag  and  immersed  in  the  first 
vessel  containing  water  at  120°-132°  F.,  keeping  the  wheat  in  constant 
agitation  by  moving  the  bag  in  the  water,  or  by  stirring  the  wheat.  In 
about  five  minutes,  when  the  seed  will  be  well  warmed  and  thoroughly 
wet,  it  is  raised  out  and  most  of  the  water  allowed  to  drain  out,  then 
immersed  in  the  second  vessel  containing  water  at  132°-135°  F.,  moving 
or  stirring  as  before,  and  keeping  close  watch  that  the  temperature  does 
not  fall  below  132°.  After  twelve  minutes  it  may  be  taken  out  and 
spread  out  to  dry  at  some  place  where  it  will  not  be  contaminated  with 
fresh  spores.  When  it  is  dry  it  may  be  sown.  Some  advise  dipping  in 
cold  water  at  last,  but  that  retards  the  drying,  and  should  be  omitted. 

Cautions. — 1.  Keep  the  water  in  the  first  vessel  well  up  to  132°  in 
temperature,  as  the  cold  wheat  will  lower  it  rapidly. 

2.  Keep  the  temperature  within  the  limits  stated  for  the  second  vessel 
(which  should  be  a  large  one),  or  the  method  will  not  give  the  desired 
results. 

3.  He  sure  the  thermometer  registers  correctly. 

4.  The  seed-wheat  will  swell  somewhat,  and  one  third  to  one  half 
more  bulk  of  seed  must  be  sown  to  remedv  this  result. 


